Improving the validity of letters of recommendation: an investigation of three standardized reference forms.

Although letters of recommendation are (LORs) widely used, little research has examined how accurately they predict job performance. The few existing studies have yielded mixed results, and meta-analytic estimates of validity range from .14 to .27 (Hunter & Hunter, 1984; Reilly & Chao, 1982). This i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Military Psychology Vol. 13; no. 4; pp. 199 - 223
Autores principales: Mccarthy JM, Goffin RD
Formato: Journal Article
Publicado: Taylor & Francis Ltd Oct2001
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=106051525&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 106051525
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        08995605
        7MP
      jtl: Military Psychology
      issn: 08995605
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Oct2001
      vid: 13
      iid: 4
      pid: 377
      pub: Taylor & Francis Ltd
      place: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
    artinfo:
      ui:
        106051525
        2009439906
        106051525
      ppf: 199
      ppct: 24
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
      tig:
        atl: Improving the validity of letters of recommendation: an investigation of three standardized reference forms.
      aug:
        au:
          Mccarthy JM
          Goffin RD
      sug:
      ab: Although letters of recommendation are (LORs) widely used, little research has examined how accurately they predict job performance. The few existing studies have yielded mixed results, and meta-analytic estimates of validity range from .14 to .27 (Hunter & Hunter, 1984; Reilly & Chao, 1982). This investigation was designed to improve predictive validity by developing a standardized reference form and evaluating 3 different rating formats: Multi-Item scales, Relative Percentile Method (RPM) scales, and Global Trait Rankings. A total of 520 individuals applied to the Canadian military, and 544 LORs were obtained. Complete predictor and criterion data were available for 57 participants. Regression analyses indicated that the validity of the RPM rating format (R[sup 2][sub (adj)] = .18; R[sub (adj)] = .42) was substantially higher than previous estimates of LOR validity. The 2 remaining methods produced nonsignificant results. Limitations of the study, suggestions for future research, and implications for the field are discussed.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N